Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 1 de 1
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Zhong Yao Cai ; 30(3): 285-9, 2007 Mar.
Artigo em Chinês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-17634033

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To compare the analytical method of LC-UV and LC-MS determination of major polyphenolic components in leaves of Crataegus L. METHODS: By high-performance liquid chromatography method with VWD and MSD, Lichropsher C18 column (250 x 4.6 mm I.D., 5 microm); mobile phase consisted of solvent A (acetonitrile) and solvent B (0.05% formic acid) ; elution profile was: 0-12 min 11% to 17% A in B (linear gradient), 12-30 min 17% to 18% A in B (linear gradient), 30-45 min 18% to 40% A in B (linear gradient), 45-60 min 40% to 100% A in B (linear gradient); flow rate was 1.00 ml/min, flow into MSD and VWD by diffluence, column temperature 30 degrees C and the injection volume 10 microl. RESULT: The sensitivity of LC-MS was 10 times more than that of LC-UV, so it is preponderance for microanalysis. Additionally, because LC-MS can identify the component by retention time (t(R)) and m/z, it has high selectivity and exclusion for the determined component. However, the method of LC-UV is simple; the cost is lower; the separate effect is better. So it is preponderance to determine the higher content component, which has better separate effect. CONCLUSION: LC-UV and LC-MS exhibited their own predominance for determination of major polyphenolic components in leaves of Crataegus L. So the detector should be selected according to the determined targets.


Assuntos
Cromatografia Líquida de Alta Pressão , Crataegus/química , Espectrometria de Massas , Espectrofotometria Ultravioleta , Folhas de Planta/química , Solventes
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA